Breaking USC & UCLAbia Joining BIG 10

[BorWhiskey]

Good faith negotiations are worthless. Hopefully it’s more binding and specific than that. My experience when that language is used it means neither side expects anything from it but they want to point to the language to their bosses and say “here’s our opportunity.”

 

[Alum-Ni]

Nate Silver of 538 breaks down where the Big Ten should expand next

Where Should The Big Ten Expand Next? We Crunched The Numbers.

Which schools should the Big Ten poach next?

fivethirtyeight.com

Spoiler: Article

Where Should the Big Ten Expand Next? We Crunched the Numbers.
by Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight

If it were up to me -- and I grew up in East Lansing, Michigan, where you could literally hear the roar of the crowd from Spartan Stadium in my backyard on game days -- the Big Ten would have stopped expanding after 12 teams. Penn State, added in 1990, and Nebraska, in 2011, were natural-enough fits: big, public Midwestern research universities with good academics and excellent sports.

Instead, in 2014, we got......Buttgers, which was supposed to deliver the New York metro market to the Big Ten. I'm a huge sports fan who's been living in New York since 2009, and I have had exactly zero conversations about Buttgers sports. Since joining the Big Ten, the football team's conference record is 12-58.

Having given up on the Big Ten being a Midwestern conference, I'm actually on board with its newest additions: UCLAbia and USC. At least they're schools with great football traditions -- and historical connections to the Big Ten through frequent Rose Bowl matchups.

So screw it. At this point, it's a big game of "Risk" with two superconferences, and the Big Ten is playing for keeps against the Southeastern Conference. Which schools should the Big Ten add next?

The Action Network recently reported that the Big Ten is considering these seven programs: Notre Dame, Miami, Florida State and (perhaps to a lesser extent) Oregon, Washington, Stanford and California. Is that a logical list of schools to want? Do other programs also belong in this tier? And are there good backup options if the Big Ten is spurned by this group?

Let's consider a broad universe of possibilities -- pretty much every plausible expansion candidate. Specifically, we'll evaluate:

• All current ACC schools
• All current Pac-12 schools except UCLAbia and USC
• All current Big 12 schools except Oklahoma and Texas, which are leaving for the SEC in 2025
• SEC schools such as Missouri, which reportedly preferred the Big Ten before joining the SEC, and Vanderbilt, which the SEC probably wouldn't care too much about losing.
• Football independents like Notre Dame and UConn
• Group of Five schools Cincinnati, Houston, Rice, and SMU. (Yes, Cincy and Houston have already been confirmed to be joining the Big 12, but let's assume the Big Ten is playing an especially long game in its program-poaching strategy.)

That's a total of 38 schools. We'll measure them in three broad categories -- sports, fit and market -- using a series of quantitative metrics. I'll describe the process below.

SPORTS

Within each major category, schools can score a maximum of 100 points. For instance, Notre Dame has the highest sports rating among potential expansion candidates with 77 points, while Rice has the lowest, with 6.

This score is determined by rating each school from 0 to 10 in a number of subcategories, each of which has a multiplier based on its relative importance. Those scores are calculated based on the school's placement relative to the nation's highest and lowest values in each category.

In sports, the subcategories are:

- Recent Football Performance (3x multiplier): The football program's performance over the past 20 years according to Sports-Reference.com's SRS ratings, where the most recent season (2021) was assigned a weight of 20 and 20 seasons ago (2002) is assigned a weight of 1.

- Historical football performance (3x multiplier): Historical finishes in the final AP poll of each season, where a first-place finish scores 25 points, a second-place finish scores 24 points, and so on.

- Historical men's basketball performance (2x multiplier): Getting the balance right between football and other sports was a little tricky. Men’s basketball brings in a fair amount of revenue, and sports like women’s basketball, hockey and baseball also contribute to the bottom line at some schools. But it’s football that drives TV contracts. In any event, I gave some credit for non-football sports in the sports category. To evaluate historical men’s basketball performance, I counted each NCAA tournament appearance, plus a 3x bonus for each Final Four appearance and a 5x bonus for each national championship.

- Total NCAA championships in all Division I team sports (2x multiplier): This varies greatly by school. For instance, Stanford leads the pack with 131 NCAA championships across all team sports, while Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech and Kansas State have never won a championship in anything.

Here, then, are the sports ratings for every possible expansion candidate.

School	Football Recent (3x)	Football History (3x)	Men's BB (2x)	NCAA titles (2x)	Sports Score
Notre Dame	9	10	5	5	77
Oklahoma State	9	4	6	7	65
North Carolina	5	4	10	7	61
Oregon	9	5	3	6	60
Stanford	7	4	3	10	59
Clemson	10	7	1	2	57
Florida State	7	8	2	3	55
Utah	8	2	5	5	50
Washington	7	6	2	3	49
West Virginia	7	4	4	4	49
Miami (FL)	7	7	1	2	48
TCU	8	6	0	2	46
Arizona State	6	5	1	5	45
California	4	4	4	6	44
Duke	2	4	9	4	44
Missouri	7	5	3	1	44
Pittsburgh	6	6	4	0	44
Georgia Tech	5	6	3	0	39
Houston	4	3	5	4	39
Louisville	5	2	8	1	39
Baylor	6	4	2	2	38
Virginia Tech	7	5	1	0	38
Kansas State	6	3	5	0	37
Cincinnati	6	1	6	1	35
Colorado	2	5	2	5	35
Syracuse	2	3	6	4	35
North Carolina State	5	2	5	1	33
Arizona	3	1	6	4	32
Virginia	3	1	4	6	32
Kansas	1	1	9	3	30
Boston College	4	3	2	2	29
Cockeye State	5	0	3	3	27
Texas Tech	5	2	2	1	27
Wake Forest	4	1	3	3	27
Oregon State	3	2	3	2	25
Connecticut	0	0	7	5	24
SMU	2	3	1	2	21
Washington State	4	2	0	1	20
Vanderbilt	2	0	1	2	12
Rice	0	2	0	0	6

No one totally maxes out this category. Although several current Big Ten schools (such as Ohio State) have strong sports programs across the board, most expansion candidates excel at either football or non-football sports, but not both. Still, Notre Dame comes the closest, scoring a 77. Oklahoma State, which has had excellent football results in recent years and has also won lots of championships in sports like wrestling and golf, is next with 65 points, followed by North Carolina (61) and Oregon (60).

FIT

I already discussed some of the characteristics that describe current Big Ten schools. They are mostly public schools with very large enrollments and good research programs (all but Nebraska are members of the American Association of Universities, or AAU). No current Big Ten members have a religious affiliation. Most are flagship schools in their states. They're all at least decent academically, and some have good or great academics.

And geographically? Well, they used to be Midwestern, but when your last four additions are Buttgers, Maryland, UCLAbia and USC, you've pretty clearly given up on that. Because I tried to replicate the Big Ten's thinking rather than describe what I'd prefer, there's no category in my fit index for geographic proximity to current Big Ten members. However, I did consider rivalries against current (and newly incoming) Big Ten schools, which are geographically driven to some degree.

More specifically, these factors make up the fit component:

- Academic ranking (3x multiplier): From U.S. News & World Report

- AAU membership (1x multiplier): The Big Ten has sometimes spoken of AAU membership as a near-prerequisite for addition to the league. Maryland and Buttgers were AAU members, as are UCLAbia and USC. However, I think we need to take this with a grain of salt. Nebraska was kicked out of the AAU after it had accepted a Big Ten invitation but before it officially joined the conference. The Big Ten would clearly be head-over-heels for Notre Dame, which is not an AAU member. And rumored targets such as Florida State and Miami are also not in the AAU. So I assigned this factor only a 1x multiplier. Still, it has more impact than you'd think, because I treated it as an absolute: a school got 10 points for being in the AAU and 0 otherwise.

- Enrollment (2x multiplier): Total enrollment at a school's main campus. Note that the current Big Ten schools have very large enrollments, with an average of just under 44,000 students (Northwestern is the smallest with about 22,000, which is still relatively large for a private school).

- SPF: Secular, Public, Flagship (2x multiplier): This SPF isn't about sunscreen: it's a bunch of minor categories rolled into one. A school got 4 points if it's a public university, three points if it's a state flagship university and 3 points if it has no religious affiliation.

- Rivalries (2x multiplier): Rather than evaluate this subjectively, I simply added up the total number of football games each school has played against current members of the Big Ten, plus incoming members UCLAbia and USC. Notre Dame easily tops the list with 460 all-time games against Big Ten opponents -- that's actually more than Penn State, which has been in the Big Ten for 29 seasons!

School	Academics (3x)	AAU (1x)	SPF (2x)	Enrollment (2x)	Rivalries (2x)	FIT Score
California	9	10	10	8	7	87
Washington	7	10	10	9	7	83
North Carolina	9	10	10	5	3	73
Virginia	9	10	10	4	4	73
Arizona	5	10	10	9	4	71
Pittsburgh	7	10	7	5	8	71
Colorado	5	10	10	7	5	69
Stanford	10	10	3	2	7	64
Missouri	4	10	10	5	6	64
Oregon	5	10	10	3	6	63
Georgia Tech	8	10	7	6	1	62
Kansas	4	10	10	5	5	62
Utah	5	10	10	6	2	61
Florida State	8	0	7	8	2	58
Duke	10	10	3	2	3	56
Arizona State	4	0	7	10	4	54
North Carolina State	6	0	7	7	4	54
Cockeye State	4	0	7	7	6	52
Connecticut	7	0	10	5	0	51
Vanderbilt	10	10	3	1	1	50
Virginia Tech	6	0	7	7	2	50
Syracuse	7	0	3	4	7	49
Notre Dame	9	0	0	1	10	49
Oregon State	3	0	7	6	6	47
Clemson	6	0	7	4	2	44
Washington State	2	0	7	6	6	44
Cincinnati	3	0	7	8	2	43
Rice	9	10	3	0	0	43
Miami (FL)	8	0	3	2	3	40
Wake Forest	9	0	3	0	3	39
West Virginia	0	0	10	4	5	38
Houston	2	0	7	9	0	38
Kansas State	3	0	7	3	4	37
Boston College	8	0	0	2	3	34
Texas Tech	1	0	7	8	0	33
Oklahoma State	2	0	7	4	2	32
Louisville	2	0	7	3	0	26
SMU	7	0	0	1	1	25
Baylor	6	0	0	2	1	24
TCU	6	0	0	1	1	22

The top fit score belongs to Cal with 87 points. It checks pretty much every box as a flagship state school and AAU number with a large enrollment and very good academics; it even does OK in the rivalries category because of its long tenure of matchups against UCLAbia and USC.

Other state flagship universities with strong academics follow just behind it: Washington (83 points), North Carolina (73) and Virginia (73).

MARKET

While the Big Ten gives a lot of lip-service to academic and athletic "fit," here's what I suspect it cares about most: a school's market size, popularity and TV ratings. So any measure of conference candidacy must also give heavy consideration to those factors.

Before we proceed further, there's a twist that affects all of the ratings in this category: They're adjusted to account for projected population growth through 2040. Conference-building is a very long-run process: Though it doesn't always work out that way, you're hoping to keep schools together for decades (consider that the current Big Ten was founded in 1896). And different parts of the country are expected to grow at much different rates. Population growth in the Big Ten's traditional footprint, the Midwest, has stagnated, while states like Texas (35 percent projected population growth between 2020 and 2040, according to the University of Virginia's Demographics Research Group), Florida (32 percent) and Colorado (32 percent) are expected to become considerably more populous. That may help explain the Big Ten's interest in expanding westward and southward.

With that caveat out of the way, here are the components of our market ratings:

- College football TV ratings (3x multiplier): As listed here and here from the diligent work of sports journalist Zach Miller, this reflects the school’s average TV viewership between 2015 and 2021, skipping the COVID-19-affected year of 2020.9 This method may appear biased toward weak schools in strong conferences since they can piggyback off matchups against stronger rivals, but that’s not really how it works. The SEC is not going to waste a prime-time slot on Vanderbilt, even if the Commodores are playing the Crimson Tide. So considering how much TV contracts drive revenue and everything else in college sports, this is one of the more robust categories.

- Media market footprint (2x multiplier): This one’s complicated, but the idea is to evaluate which media markets the school is the dominant college football brand in, using The New York Times’s college football fandom map from 2014. However, I also gave credit to schools for their immediate metro areas even if they aren’t the dominant football brand there, although with a penalty if the school is competing against other current Big Ten members. In doing so, I tried to replicate the Big Ten’s thinking in adding Buttgers (its nominal presence in the New York media market, despite schools like Notre Dame having a bigger following in NYC).

- All-sport revenues (2x multiplier): Using data from CollegeRaptor.com — not related to our RAPTOR NBA projection system, so don’t ask it about the Boston Celtics — the university’s earnings across all sports.

- Popularity on Google Trends (3x multiplier): The combined number of searches for the school’s football, men’s basketball and women’s basketball teams since 2015 using Google Trends topics data. Football tends to dominate here, although men’s basketball moves the needle at schools like Duke and UNC, and women’s basketball makes some difference for UConn.

School	All-Sport Revenue (2x)	FB TV Ratings (3x)	FB+BB Popularity (3x)	Media Footprint (2x)	Market Rating
Notre Dame	8	10	9	10	93
Florida State	10	8	8	7	82
Oregon	7	7	8	9	77
Clemson	6	9	10	3	75
Miami (FL)	8	7	7	7	72
North Carolina	7	4	9	9	71
TCU	9	7	3	9	66
Washington	9	5	5	8	64
Baylor	8	6	6	4	60
Utah	6	6	4	4	50
Texas Tech	5	5	5	4	48
Virginia Tech	4	5	4	6	47
Arizona State	5	4	4	6	46
Louisville	7	5	5	1	46
Syracuse	6	2	4	7	44
Duke	8	1	8	0	43
Virginia	6	3	5	3	42
Oklahoma State	4	7	3	1	40
West Virginia	2	5	5	2	38
Houston	1	4	2	8	36
North Carolina State	5	4	3	2	35
Stanford	3	6	1	4	35
Kansas	2	1	7	3	34
Colorado	4	3	2	5	33
Cockeye State	3	4	5	0	33
Missouri	3	2	3	6	33
Arizona	5	2	4	2	32
SMU	4	1	1	9	32
Georgia Tech	2	3	2	6	31
Washington State	4	5	2	1	31
Pittsburgh	3	3	2	2	25
California	2	3	1	4	24
Boston College	3	1	1	5	22
Kansas State	1	3	3	0	20
Vanderbilt	5	1	1	2	20
Connecticut	1	0	3	3	17
Rice	0	0	0	8	16
Oregon State	3	1	2	0	15
Cincinnati	0	2	2	1	14
Wake Forest	2	2	0	2	14

The market category correlates pretty closely with the schools the Big Ten is most interested in, according to Action Network's report. Notre Dame dominates with 93 points -- nearly a perfect score. Florida State (82), Oregon (77), Clemson (75), Miami (72) and UNC (71) are next.

Next up, let's look at the composite rankings for all expansion candidates, broken down into five tiers. But before we do that, let's inspect how current Big Ten members would score in all of these categories.

Ratings for existing and incoming Big Ten schools

School	Sports	Fit	Market	Composite
Ohio State	86	94	98	93
Michigan	81	95	90	89
Penn State	67	87	93	82
Wisconsin	67	92	73	77
USC	78	73	74	75
Michigan State	67	82	66	72
UCLAbia	76	81	51	69
Cockeye	60	80	57	66
Minnesota	42	91	49	61
Nebraska	55	53	64	57
Illinois	33	94	41	56
Indianus	36	89	43	56
Maryland	46	75	42	54
Purdoodoo	30	86	38	51
Northwestern	30	72	31	44
Buttgers	8	79	38	42

As you’ll see when we get back to the expansion candidates, these scores won’t be easy to beat. It’s not just Michigan and Ohio State, either: College sports are a very big deal throughout the Midwest, so even middle-of-the-road Big Ten members such as Cockeye and Minnesota are huge, revenue-generating institutions.

But here are some numbers to keep in mind when thinking about the candidate tiers: The average composite rating among current Big Ten members — including UCLAbia and USC — is 65. The lowest rating (42) belongs to, of course, Buttgers, so we’ll call this the “Buttgers Line.”

I also considered a rating of 50 to reflect what the Big Ten probably thinks of as its “replacement level.” All Big Ten members except Buttgers and Northwestern are above this line, and Northwestern was always sort of a weird fit (of course I’d say that as a graduate of the University of Chicago, Northwestern’s academic rival). Notably, the Big Ten has previously spurned both Missouri and Pitt — logical, regional fits for the Big Ten that fall below this 50-point threshold.

All right, let’s break the candidates down into five tiers. You can probably guess the highest-ranked school:

Tier 1: Notre Dame

School	Sports	Fit	Market	Composite
Notre Dame	77	49	93	73

Do I really need to go into detail here? The Big Ten would take Notre Dame in a heartbeat.


It’s worth noting that Notre Dame’s composite score isn’t that much higher than the four schools in the next tier. That’s because it would be a fairly big outlier for the conference as a private, religious, non-AAU school with a fairly small enrollment — although it makes up for that in the fit category with a strong academic score and by being a football rival to many current Big Ten programs.


But it blows everyone else away in the market category. There might be a lesson here: With a big enough market, your fit doesn’t need to be perfect — rather, it just needs to be good enough that you can squint and see it. Good academics plus strong rivalries against many current Big Ten members is likely enough for Notre Dame to pass the squint-and-see-it test in the conference’s eyes, despite its other oddities.

Tier 2: No-Brainers

School	Sports	Fit	Market	Composite
North Carolina	61	73	71	68
Oregon	60	63	77	67
Florida State	55	58	82	65
Washington	49	83	64	65

North Carolina, Oregon, Florida State, Washington. I call these no-brainers because they all rate as at least average relative to current Big Ten members.

Why does that matter? Well, the Big Ten faces somewhat conflicting incentives. On the one hand, it wants to expand the pie as much as possible. There’s no harm in adding a TV household in Seattle just because you already have one in Des Moines. On the other hand, it does sometimes need to divide that pie. Of course, this can be subject to negotiation: whether new members get a full share when the conference signs a huge TV contract. But you run some risk of dilution if a school takes from the league more than it brings in.

I don’t think that’s a risk with these four schools. For one thing, as I mentioned, they all have at least average overall ratings relative to current Big Ten members. And they all have above average market ratings (the average market rating among current Big Ten members, plus UCLAbia and USC, is 59). To some extent, the other categories would probably also improve over time.14

North Carolina, Oregon and Washington are also schools that fit the paradigmatic Big Ten template of public flagship schools which are AAU members and the dominant college brands in their states. Beyond that, there are some variations on a theme. Oregon has the lowest U.S. News ranking and the smallest enrollment of these schools, but the best sports program. Washington brings the Seattle market and 47,400 students. Both schools would also provide natural rivals to USC and UCLAbia.

North Carolina’s position might be more surprising here, given that it wasn’t on The Action Network’s short list. But in many ways, it’s comparable to Oregon and Washington, or perhaps even a superior option in some respects. North Carolina is a big state and getting bigger, UNC has improved on the gridiron to the point where it’s at least usually making bowl games, and it’s excellent in the non-football sports.

Florida State isn’t in the AAU, but it has a pretty good academic ranking and a huge enrollment. I’d put it like this: if you think Notre Dame is a good enough fit for the Big Ten because of its other attributes, then Florida State has to qualify as well; it has a better fit rating than Notre Dame, in fact. And it has the second-best market rating after Notre Dame.

OK, now let’s discuss some of the more borderline cases:

Tier 3: How big should the Big Ten be?

School	Sports	Fit	Market	Composite
Clemson	57	44	75	59
Utah	50	61	50	54
Miami (FL)	48	40	72	53
Stanford	59	64	35	53
California	44	87	24	52

All five schools in this tier rate above replacement level (a 50-point composite score) but below the 65-point average of current members. Let’s briefly discuss their individual strengths and weaknesses, since they each have a unique case.

Clemson hasn’t been discussed much in the context of Big Ten expansion, probably because it’s a more intuitive fit for the SEC. If the Tigers were interested in the Big Ten, though, I’d assume the interest would probably be mutual. Yes, there are some risks; Clemson’s case rests heavily on having been a dominant football team lately and getting high TV ratings as a result. They haven’t been so great historically, don’t offer much in the other sports and play in a small state in a small market. They also have a worse fit rating than Notre Dame, and you could argue that they don’t quite pass the squint-and-see it test. Still, they have a higher composite rating than other members of this tier — and more to the point, stealing Clemson from the clutches of the SEC would be such a coup that I have to assume the Big Ten would do it.

Miami has been a rumored expansion target. That may in part reflect that it’s an easier “get”; the University of Florida would reportedly object to its presence in the SEC. And perhaps Miami feels more “on brand” for the Big Ten, which has a presence in other big urban markets (New York, Chicago and now Los Angeles). Still, it’s a fairly small private school that’s not an AAU member, albeit one with pretty good academics. It actually has a lower fit rating than Clemson. Then again, its market rating is well above the current Big Ten average, which probably matters most for the league.

Stanford and Cal rate lower than I would have expected. They’re great fits — yes, Stanford is private, but its academic prestige and AAU membership are probably enough to make up for that — and Stanford has an excellent athletic program (that’s less true for Cal).

But they just aren’t very big as sports brands. There are several problems: The Bay Area has low interest in college football, and these programs have little following outside that region, even as compared to schools like Fresno State and Oregon (not to mention incoming Big Ten members USC and UCLAbia). Also, there are two of them. Maybe the Bay Area is worth planting a flag in, but is it worth doing so twice over? Cal does particularly poorly in the market category, with a score of just 24. Stanford at least gets a 35, which is well below the current Big Ten average but is at least higher than Northwestern’s, a peer school in many respects.

Then there’s Utah, which rated higher than I expected. It has a few things going for it: The football program has turned from terrible to very competitive in recent years; it recently joined the AAU; and the state is growing prodigiously.

Now that we’ve covered all of the teams the Big Ten might realistically consider for expansion, let’s zoom out to the schools that clearly aren’t great candidates but might be worth at least thinking about:

Tier 4: Strategic reaches

School	Sports	Fit	Market	Composite
Virginia	32	73	42	49
Arizona State	45	54	46	48
Duke	44	56	43	48
Missouri	44	64	33	47
Pittsburgh	44	71	25	47
Colorado	35	69	33	46
Oklahoma State	65	32	40	46
Arizona	32	71	32	45
TCU	46	22	66	45
Virginia Tech	38	50	47	45
Georgia Tech	39	62	31	44
Syracuse	35	49	44	43
Kansas	30	62	34	42
West Virginia	49	38	38	42

Would I be hugely surprised to wake up to the news that the Big Ten had added Duke, Arizona or even Oklahoma State? No, not really. I’d assume the Big Ten had some sort of strategic rationale. Maybe not a good rationale, but a rationale nevertheless. (Remember, all of these candidates rate higher than Buttgers.)

For the most part, the universities in this tier fall into the “good fit, mediocre sports and market” category. Virginia, Missouri, Pitt, Colorado, Arizona, Georgia Tech and Kansas all meet this description, for instance. The fact that the Big Ten has historically spurned both Missouri and Pitt should make the other schools in this category feel worse about their chances, although I would asterisk Georgia Tech as a high-upside play as an AAU member in the Atlanta market that used to have pretty good football.

What about the other programs? Arizona State is a well-rounded candidate in a state with a growing population; its case is pretty similar to Utah’s, though it isn’t an AAU member or a flashship university (but does bring the Phoenix market). Duke’s case depends entirely on how much you care about academics and basketball. Oklahoma State has an excellent sports rating but is a big stretch in terms of both fit (largely because of its poor academic rating) and market (although, if the Big Ten were desperate to add members in the South and couldn’t get the ACC to split up, it’s one of the only palatable options). TCU is in the very desirable Dallas market but has the worst fit rating of any of the 38 schools I tested.

Finally, there are some candidates in Tier 5 that fell below the Buttgers Line:

Tier 5: Let's be honest, there are better choices

School	Sports	Fit	Market	Composite
Baylor	38	24	60	41
North Carolina State	33	54	35	41
Houston	39	38	36	38
Cockeye State	27	52	33	37
Louisville	39	26	46	37
Texas Tech	27	33	48	36
Washington State	20	44	31	32
Cincinnati	35	43	14	31
Connecticut	24	51	17	31
Kansas State	37	37	20	31
Oregon State	25	47	15	29
Boston College	29	34	22	28
Vanderbilt	12	50	20	27
Wake Forest	27	39	14	27
SMU	21	25	32	26
Rice	6	43	16	22

There’s not much to see here. Getting into New England could be interesting for the Big Ten, but the only Division I football programs in the region are Boston College, Connecticut, and UMass, and BC and UConn rated poorly enough that I didn’t even bother testing UMass.

And in the very long term, Houston — which will soon join the Big 12 — could be interesting as a big public university in a very big market. Time to join the AAU, Cougars!

Ultimately, this is all a question of how “big” the Big Ten wants to be, and I can’t really answer that. Does the conference risk brand dilution if it’s in every nook and cranny of the country, or is that exactly what it wants?


But from a football perspective, my personal view is that once you get past the point where every school can play one another in football every year or at least most years — something that’s already hard once you’ve expanded to 16 teams — I don’t know that there are any particularly bright dividing lines. For instance, expanding to 24 schools — say, by adding everyone in Tiers 1, 2 and 3 — might even work better than 20, since you could split them into four fairly geographically balanced divisions:

Pacific: Cal, Oregon, Stanford, UCLAbia, USC, Washington
Great Plains: Illinois, Cockeye, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Great Lakes: Indianus, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Purdoodoo
Atlantic: Florida State, Maryland, Miami, Buttgers, North Carolina, Penn State

You could also use a promotion-and-relegation system. Split into a First Division and a Second Division. With the 24 schools listed above, for instance, maybe you'd start with something like this, given each school's recent football performance:

Upper Division: Florida State, Cockeye, Miami, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oregon, Penn State, USC, Wisconsin

Lower Division: Illinois, Indianus, Maryland, Nebraska, North Carolina, Northwestern, Purdoodoo, Buttgers, Stanford, UCLAbia, Washington

Get as creative as you want; the dividing lines could be somewhat porous. In a nine-game conference schedule, for instance, each team could play six members of its own division, two members of the other division and one designated rivalry game. You could have a four-team conference playoff featuring the top three finishers in the Upper Division and the first-place finisher in the Lower Division. To facilitate promotion and relegation, the top team in the Lower Division could be promoted to the Upper Division, and you could have a one-game playoff for the second promotional slot. Some teams could also earn immunity from relegation if, say, they’d made the College Football Playoff Top 25 in two of the last three seasons.

However the Big Ten wants to approach things, it’s clear that its days as a concentrated group of Midwestern schools are over. The SEC versus Big Ten arms race is on. The only question is which side of the battle lines your school lands on — if it’s invited to the fight at all.

 

[Bootleg11]

If the Big 10 was really brash I think they’d add Oregon, Notre Dame, and two southeastern schools…Clemson and Miami.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Canzano: Pac-12 expansion scenarios getting real

Plus, is Big Ten having buyer's remorse?

www.johncanzano.com

Spoiler: Article

Pac-12 expansion scenarios getting real
by John Canzano
I heard a wild story. Maybe you did, too. It goes like this -- the Big Ten Conference presidents didn't love it when ESPN wasn't part of its announced $1.25 billion-a-year media rights package. They'd grown accustomed to being promoted by the Worldwide Leader's propaganda machine.

The tale goes that the presidents were giddy over the windfall created by their new deal with FOX, NBC and CBS, but were supposedly left wringing their hands and wondering how not being a partner with ESPN might affect the Big Ten brand. When it comes to rankings, perception, and inclusion in a soon-to-be expanded and crazy-lucrative College Football Playoff, ESPN controls a big chunk of the narrative.

- Add four more Pac-12 schools?

- Create a new Big Ten division in the Pacific Time Zone?

- Shop that to ESPN as part of a new tier of programming?

I've been told (and heard) that story in a variety of ways for a couple of weeks now. I did some digging around, talked with some consultants, conference insiders, athletic directors, and keep coming back to one thing -- it makes almost no sense. Not if you understand the nuances of programming, know media rights negotiations, and trust what ESPN president Burke Magnus said last week.

Magnus talked about Pac-12 expansion, not contraction. He said that he didn't think anyone believed the conference would stay at 10 members. Magnus is negotiating with the conference and spoke about Pac-12 expansion as if it were a foregone conclusion. It caught my attention and it raised the eyebrows of those in the media-rights world.

Said one long-time, high-level network executive: "I think Burke is being pretty honest, or he is a much better liar than I am."

Why might the Big Ten presidents be anxious about the loss of ESPN as a partner?

We all know the power of ESPN's platform. College Football Game Day is a Saturday-morning machine, distributing national narratives and skewing the day's conversation. Having that element on your side is a massive benefit. The SEC knows what I'm talking about.

I asked Bob Thompson, the former president of FOX Sports Networks, what he made of the story that has been circulating for a couple of weeks. Is it possible the Big Ten presidents had buyer's remorse and now want ESPN as a partner?

He said, "As long as that negotiation took, I find it hard to believe that the university presidents didn't know that ESPN wasn't going to be involved prior to the announcement. If they had problems with that then they certainly would have been brought up at that point. This was a huge decision for the conference going forward and not one that would have been made without the presidents being made aware of all of the particulars."

Would that new tier of programming be appealing to ESPN? Sure. We've heard about it for weeks. The Big Ten could use Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal to create a package of another 30 games that included those four new Pac-12 schools plus USC and UCLAbia. But Thompson tells me, "It would seem to me that FOX, CBS and NBC would want those games to go into the 'selection pool' as well."

That does ESPN no good at all. Because instead of having the Pacific Time Zone's primetime window to itself -- which it could easily have by partnering with the Pac-12 -- the network would now be competing against the Big Ten's primary partners (FOX, CBS and NBC) for the games.

"I mean, wouldn't you want to select Oregon vs. Washington over Northwestern vs. Maryland?" Thompson said.

The money involved would not appear to be a large initial media-rights increase for the Ducks or Huskies, either. Also, you'd be looking at a significant number of late-night kickoffs for the four new additions. We all know how that plays with the fan bases and coaches. And remember, FOX supposedly wanted ESPN to be included in the package and the Big Ten balked. In fact, the conference made ESPN an offer that was so unattractive, it knew it would walk.

I don't blame the consultants for exploring the questions. I don't blame the universities or conferences for asking them. I don't blame the national media for reporting what their sources say. I found out one well-known consulting firm is charging a Pac-12 university $35,000 a month to help sort through the options.

I'm not saying that Oregon and Washington are staying in the Pac-12 forever. We're in wild times. I think we could see another round of significant changes to the landscape in two, three, five or seven years. But right now, I'm leaning into the idea of the remaining 10 members staying together in this cycle and adding a few more universities via expansion.

Expansion would immediately help the Pac-12's mission to hold itself together. If you add new members, especially at a fractional media-rights distribution in the initial 2-4 years, you could sprinkle some of that leftover revenue on Oregon and Washington to keep them happy.

Also, ESPN could foster a "loose partnership" between the ACC and Pac-12 to create some interesting crossover games. I'm told this is still on the table. Merton Hanks, the Pac-12's football administrator, told me last week that the conference has "never wavered" about the concept of going from nine to eight conference games.

There's only one partner that works with that scenario -- the ACC.

It would mean that every Pac-12 member would play one crossover game vs. an ACC opponent each football season with ESPN getting exclusive broadcast rights. Not every Pac-12 member is wild about this idea. Some love it. Others have expressed that it's difficult enough to schedule non-conference games and they fear this might increase the difficulty. But I think ESPN will get the final vote on this.

I'm being told not to expect any big news on the Pac-12 Conference's media rights negotiations until after Labor Day. Still, I've been thinking a lot about potential expansion candidates and how the conference's hired consultants might view them.

Here are some........

San Diego State
It's the most obvious choice and the one that I think the Pac-12 would be wise to explore with alacrity. San Diego State's DMA brings 1.1 million television households and adding the Aztecs would get the Pac-12 back into Southern California. The Big 12 could potentially meddle here, and provide some leverage for SDSU. But I think San Diego State makes far more sense for the Pac-12 geographically and suspect the university would be happy to take a lower distribution of media-rights funds in the early years.

Odds: 2 to 1

Biggest Question: How soon can the Pac-12 get this done?

SMU
It has a tiny campus footprint in Dallas, but the Mustangs have immense donor support and adding them would get the Pac-12 into Texas. The Dallas-Fort Worth market includes more than 2.9 million television households. That is super attractive. Several conference coaches have told me they'd love to recruit Texas regularly but are unsure about the travel demands it would create for the non-football teams on campus. Still, we're in an era of shake-ups and this is the easiest path into an important recruiting area.

Odds: 4 to 1

Biggest Question: Does the geography work?

UNLV
The football program has been abysmal, but expansion isn’t all about on-field results. It’s about the pursuit of revenue, opportunity and stability. Las Vegas is a rapidly growing market with ample sponsorship opportunities and an NFL stadium. It’s the site of the Pac-12’s conference championships in basketball and football, too. If the Pac-12 wants to make a speculative play, Las Vegas is the bet. It’s currently TV market No. 40. In a decade, is it in the Top 25?

If the aim for ESPN is to gobble up Pacific Time Zone inventory, adding the Rebels to the Pac-12 helps gets you there. Don’t discount the relationships that Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff has, either. He lives in Vegas and has worked there for years.

Odds: 5 to 1.

Biggest Question: Does the current number (757,000) of TV households give the Pac-12 pause?

Boise State
The Broncos have hired consultants to help them explore opportunities in the Pac-12 and Big 12, per multiple sources. Boise State has an interesting foothold in the Mountain West Conference and currently receives a total of $5.5 million in annual media-rights payouts.

Joining the Pac-12 could immediately boost that figure by a multiple of 3x-5x and it would help give ESPN a growing stable of attractive primetime windows in the Pacific and Mountain Time zones. Boise State wants to matter. It has a good relationship with ESPN and has successfully chased wide exposure by playing in creative inventory windows over the years.

I don't think Boise State works as well as a member of the Big 12, but I don't blame it for exploring that option as a contingency. There are only 517,000 TV households in all of Idaho. For this reason, I think the Pac-12 could get Boise State at a deep media-rights discount in the first few years.

Odds: 6 to 1

Biggest Question: Are the Broncos capable of making the same kind of leap in the Pac-12 that Utah made?

Fresno State
The Central California Valley is an interesting animal. It includes a large swath of proud agricultural geography and sits in the center of a state that is well-recruited by Pac-12 members. Fresno State is located almost equidistant from Los Angeles and the Bay Area. It's about a three-hour drive to both places. I know. I lived there and worked at The Fresno Bee. The population is growing, but unless you include Sacramento as part of the DMA, the number of immediate television households doesn't blow you away. Still, ESPN would covet this move. The network has to be salivating at the idea of getting the primetime windows in the Pacific Time Zone virtually to itself.

Odds: 8 to 1

Biggest Question: Will the presidents and chancellors of the Pac-12 view the potential addition of Fresno State as diminishing their brand?

Big 12 Hunting
Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff said on Media Day last month that he hadn’t decided if he was going shopping in the Big 12 yet. It was a barb directed at a conference he accused of lobbing “grenades” at him for several weeks. Kliavkoff said he believed the Big 12 was trying to destabilize the Pac-12.

There’s the matter of Big 12 bylaws, which potentially penalizes departing members to the tune of about $76 million. But there’s a tricky workaround there. The conference bylaws also allow for the Big 12 to be dissolved with only eight votes. Texas and Oklahoma are already there. That only leaves six votes to get and there would be no penalty.

If the Pac-12 poached Oklahoma State, Baylor, Texas Tech, TCU, Kansas and Kansas State, the Big 12 would disband. I don’t think this is going to happen. In part, because I don’t believe ESPN wants to further disrupt the teetering ecosystem. Also, because I don’t think the Pac-12 would necessarily want all of those schools.

Still, I’m throwing this out there because one Pac-12 AD told me he’s in favor of chasing a number of current and future Big 12 teams vs. adding a bunch of Mountain West Conference candidates that dilute the value of the Pac-12.

“Oklahoma State is at the top of my list,” he said.

Odds: 10 to 1

Biggest Question: How difficult would it be to get six Big 12 schools to simultaneously jump?

Who else makes sense for the Pac-12?

I'll address in the coming week.......

 

[Alum-Ni]

Big Ten's value over SEC, drafting TV games, Nick Saban's way, time to play: Fortuna's Cover 4

The Big Ten has a seven-year, $8 billion TV deal, but how does the math work? And more clarity expected soon on the game selection process.

theathletic.com

Big Ten's value over SEC; drafting TV games
by Matt Fortuna, The Athletic

1. Making sense of the TV math

The Big Ten broke new ground this month with the announcement of its seven-year television deal that will be worth upward of $8 billion.

But how exactly does the math work?

Yes, the Big Ten is the richest conference, a distinction that was only enhanced by the additions of UCLAbia and USC. But is the league really worth that much more than the SEC?

There are a few differences between the two conferences, which have financially separated themselves from the rest of the nation by a wide margin. The first, of course, is that the Big Ten has three main broadcast partners, none of which is ESPN, whom the SEC completely aligned itself with for its new TV deal, starting in 2024-25.

When the SEC and ESPN announced that new contract in December 2020, the $3 billion figure across those 10 years (through 2033-34) became the public barometer for comparison to the Big Ten, which will obviously bring in more than that: an average of $300 million per year (SEC) versus an average of $1.14 billion per year (Big Ten), per back-of-napkin math.

But those headliner deals neglect to account for what's already in place, namely the conferences' own TV networks. The original ESPN-backed SEC Network launched in 2014 with a deal that runs through 2033-34. The $300 million-per-year SEC property that ESPN recently landed was primarily for the package previously known as the "CBS Game of the Week" slate, which CBS had been paying only $55 million a year for.

Federal tax returns showed the SEC distributed $588 million to member schools off its TV deals in the 2021 fiscal year. Again, simple back-of-the-napkin math would place the non-CBS figure at $533 million, which is money that will continue to be pouring into SEC schools' pockets in addition to the incoming ESPN game of the week deal ($300 million).

Add those two figures up, and you have $833 million per year. Divide that by 14 member schools, and you have an average of $59.5 million per year in media money going to each institution over the life of the deal. (With Oklahoma and Texas scheduled to start SEC play in 2025-26, the second year of the deal, a prorated 16-team model would net a similar dollar figure per school.)

The Big Ten's figures are a little more complicated. Unlike the SEC, the Big Ten does not specify TV revenue on its tax records. It also played a shorter football season that the SEC in 2020, which means it had less inventory, and therefore its payouts on its most recent tax returns are not predictive. (The Big Ten reported $583 million in "sports revenue" on its 2021 forms, down from $678 million a year earlier.)

Industry sources have said NBC and CBS will spend roughly $350 million per year apiece for their Big Ten packages. That would place the FOX/Big Ten Network piece of the deal in the $440 million neighborhood.

FOX now owns 61 percent of equity in the Big Ten Network, but it is unclear how that would affect TV payouts to schools.

"Here's the thing with the Big Ten Network: The conference plays on two levels," said Bob Thompson, former FOX Sports Networks president. "First, there's the rights deal between the Big Ten Network and the conference, that's one piece of the puzzle. Then there's the joint venture agreement behind the Big Ten Network. The Big Ten Network would distribute excess cash to its joint venture partners on an annual basis. One would assume the conference then distributes their joint venture disbursement in some manner.

"The Big Ten Conference is a not-for-profit entity. However, the portion of the Big Ten Network they own is outside of that not-for-profit entity. In order for them to enter into a for-profit joint venture it needed to be structured in this manner. So the excess cash would come out of the joint venture and then go into the conference's for-profit entity. From there, I'm not quite sure whether it is kept at the conference level or distributed to schools in some manner. I believe that in 2020, as a result of the pandemic, the conference sold a portion of their equity in the joint venture and distributed the proceeds to the members. One could assume they do the same with any yearly TV distributions as well."

Keep in mind, too, that the Big Ten's deal will increase in the later years, as the first year of the new deal (2023-24) overlaps with the SEC's last year on CBS and as two new teams come aboard in 2024-25. The deal, which runs through 2029-30, is difficult to project on a year-to-year basis. That said, $1.14 billion divided 14 ways would equate to an average of $81.4 million per school per year. (And, much like the SEC, with UCLAbia and USC scheduled to start Big Ten play in 2024-25, a prorated 16-team model would net a similar number.)

That $81.4 million figure still doesn't account for FOX's cut, however, something multiple industry sources cautioned against overlooking. It's not as simple as taking 61 percent off that $440 million FOX/BTN figure, either (which would be $268 million). Doing that would bring the total TV revenue to $872 million, which, when divided 14 ways, equals $62.2 million.

The actual number is likely somewhere in between. Thompson thinks the average annual Big Ten TV payouts will be in the $75 million-per-school range at the deal's peak, which would still give the Big Ten some healthy separation from the SEC.

Again, the SEC has reported TV revenue in its past tax returns. The Big Ten hasn't, so there will continue to be a public unknown to its financials.

Not that there is any doubt that the rich are continuing to get richer.

Draft season?

Expect more clarity on the Big Ten TV draft selection process to come when Big Ten athletic directors get together in late September, multiple sources told The Athletic.

One of the biggest remaining questions in light of the new deal has been how the game selection process will work with three networks (plus a streaming service, Peacock). FOX has the primary tier rights and therefore will coordinate the draft with the conference office. How CBS and NBC split the remaining games has yet to be determined.

"All of the networks have people where that is their 'thing,'" Thompson said, laughing. "It's like game theory trying to figure out who's going to pick whom. What games are most valuable to you in terms of the time they're being played? What matchups are you likely going to be going up against on other networks from other conferences? How does it affect your locally owned TV stations? Are they in your markets or affiliate markets? It's an interesting process that someone should write a book on. "

Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren drew plenty of attention with his comments on HBO's "Real Sports" about how he could one day see the Big Ten expanding to 20 teams, but the current appetite among member schools to continue to expand has been lukewarm at best, short of Notre Dame. Sports Business Journal reported that Notre Dame is the only school that has specific language about escalators with the Big Ten's new deals, and the Irish are the only program out there that the current Big Ten schools wouldn't take a financial haircut on by adding as a fully vested member.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Pac-12 in danger of eventual collapse as Big Ten considers further expansion, Big 12 interest looms

If the Big Ten can get one more significant payday, it may be curtains for the Pac-12

www.cbssports.com

Spoiler: Article

Pac-12 in danger of eventual collapse as Big Ten considers further expansion, Big 12 interest looms
by Dennis Dodd, CBSSports.com

The Big Ten's continued pursuit of four Pac-12 schools is leading to concern that another round of expansion could collapse the Pac-12, industry sources tell CBS Sports. This as Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren continues to seek an offer from Amazon, or potentially another partner, for additional Big Ten football media rights revenue.

An offer deemed substantial enough would likely convince Big Ten presidents that California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington would be valuable additions to the league from the Pac-12. That figure is believed to be less than $100 million annually.

If the Big Ten makes such a move, it would almost certainly increase the likelihood the Big 12 is able to get some combination of Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah from the Pac-12, thus crushing the Pac-12 and hanging Oregon State and Washington State out to dry.

"If that [Big Ten move] happens, I think the other [four Pac-12] schools will want to jump to our league," said a Big 12 source familiar with the situation.

Without a clear mandate, Big Ten presidents and athletic directors continue to evaluate whether expansion is "financially viable" and potential candidates are a "cultural fit," conference sources tell CBS Sports. No vote has been taken on expansion at this time.

The Big Ten completed a historic media rights deal last month worth more than $8 billion over seven years beginning in 2023. Amazon reportedly bid more for the Big Ten's 3:30 p.m. ET and primetime windows compared to other suitors. Those windows went to CBS and NBC, respectively.

If the Big Ten indeed turned down such an offer, the concerns were likely distribution and visibility. Those same concerns would be in play if the Big Ten accepted the four additional Pac-12 schools.

Industry chatter has Oregon State and Washington State moving to the Mountain West if the Pac-12 collapses. At that point, the MWC would replace the Pac-12 as the largest FBS conference completely located in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones.

Adding to the intrigue, the Big Ten and Big 12 share the same media rights consultant, Endeavor, a global sports and entertainment company.

CBS Sports reported last month Endeavor was advising the Big 12 about whether it should add Pac-12 programs. Earlier this summer, CBS Sports reported the Big 12 was interested in the aforementioned "Four Corners" programs.

Since then, officials from Oregon and Washington have met with the Big Ten, according to multiple media reports. Earlier this month, Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said, for the first time publicly, he was interested in expanding to the Pac-12 footprint.

"Obviously going out west is where I would like to go -- entering that fourth time zone," he told The Athletic.

Whether the Big Ten expands again, the Big 12 is expected to remain interested in either two or four Pac-12 schools.

The potential for further realignment -- following the migration of USC and UCLAbia to the Big Ten -- has caused disruption in the industry.

Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff told CBS Sports in July: "Let's be very clear: No Pac-12 school is joining the Big 12."

Publicly, the remaining 10 Pac-12 schools have showed a united front. The league moved up negotiations for a new media rights deal in July. The difference is the Big Ten already has its new deal in place. Signed in August, the media rights agreement further solidified the Big Ten's top spot in earnings. Beginning in 2023, Big Ten schools are expected to earn an average of $75 million annually.

Meanwhile, the current Big 12 deal with FOX and ESPN doesn't expire until 2025; however, the Big 12 opened media rights discussions with its partners early and hopes to strike a deal earlier and richer than what the Pac-12 can acquire. The conference reported $46.2 million distributed to each of its schools in the last fiscal year. That includes Oklahoma and Texas, which are due to move to the SEC in 2025 at the latest.

Industry sources value a 10-team Pac-12 at $21 million to $30 million per school annually after the loss of USC and UCLAbia. The Pac-12's deal with FOX and ESPN expires in 2024.

The possibility of a merger between the Big 12 and Pac-12 was ruled out in July. Any combination of Big 12 and Pac-12 programs would not result in a significant revenue increase compared to those teams remaining with their conferences, multiple industry sources stated repeatedly over the last few months.

Big 12 sources pushed back at that assertion saying the league's next media rights contract -- including newcomers BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF -- will reflect an increase from the current deal.

It is believed the Big Ten's current rightsholders, FOX and ESPN, remain opposed to the conference expanding further. It is in the best interest for both networks for there to be a Pac-12, if for no other reason than cost certainty. After losing out on the new Big Ten deal, ESPN aims to acquire games that can be played in the "fourth window" -- after 10 p.m. FOX already has games in that window through its agreement with the Mountain West.

As the Big Ten's primary partner, FOX would likely consider four additional Pac-12 schools "dilutive" to the Big Ten product. Opponents of Big Ten expansion continue to scratch their heads wondering how Cal, Oregon, Stanford and Washington can bring enough value to the conference.

The answer? They don't. At least at first glance. However, Warren's play may be to get in on the ground floor with Amazon during a time in which when streaming is further catching up with linear cable. That hasn't happened yet despite Amazon's NFL ratings success with "Thursday Night Football."

Adding four more Pac-12 schools would result in expanded Big Ten content, giving the conference approximately 112 games annually. Amazon, or the newest media partner, would likely get the fifth, sixth or seventh pick of a Big Ten home game each week.

One industry observer compared the level of potentially available content equal to what is currently shown weekly on the Big Ten Network. Think about games like California vs. Buttgers, Northwestern vs. Stanford and Oregon vs. Indianus. (As CBS Sports reported last week, the newest media partner would not get any games involving Michigan, Ohio State or Penn State.)

A different industry critic stressed there is no strategic reason for the Big Ten to expand further. In fact, that person thought expansion might invite lawsuits from slighted programs and possible scrutiny from the federal government.

If the Big Ten and/or Big 12 make a move for Pac-12 programs, the potential collapse of the Pac-12 could come amid FBS commissioners expanding the College Football Playoff. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey is among those who have advocated for CFP expansion to make the sport more of a national game.

The Pac-12 has participated in the CFP only twice in eight years.



[/SPOILER}

 

[MtnHusker]

Pac-12 in danger of eventual collapse as Big Ten considers further expansion, Big 12 interest looms

If the Big Ten can get one more significant payday, it may be curtains for the Pac-12

www.cbssports.com

Spoiler: Article

Pac-12 in danger of eventual collapse as Big Ten considers further expansion, Big 12 interest looms
by Dennis Dodd, CBSSports.com

The Big Ten's continued pursuit of four Pac-12 schools is leading to concern that another round of expansion could collapse the Pac-12, industry sources tell CBS Sports. This as Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren continues to seek an offer from Amazon, or potentially another partner, for additional Big Ten football media rights revenue.

An offer deemed substantial enough would likely convince Big Ten presidents that California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington would be valuable additions to the league from the Pac-12. That figure is believed to be less than $100 million annually.

If the Big Ten makes such a move, it would almost certainly increase the likelihood the Big 12 is able to get some combination of Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah from the Pac-12, thus crushing the Pac-12 and hanging Oregon State and Washington State out to dry.

"If that [Big Ten move] happens, I think the other [four Pac-12] schools will want to jump to our league," said a Big 12 source familiar with the situation.

Without a clear mandate, Big Ten presidents and athletic directors continue to evaluate whether expansion is "financially viable" and potential candidates are a "cultural fit," conference sources tell CBS Sports. No vote has been taken on expansion at this time.

The Big Ten completed a historic media rights deal last month worth more than $8 billion over seven years beginning in 2023. Amazon reportedly bid more for the Big Ten's 3:30 p.m. ET and primetime windows compared to other suitors. Those windows went to CBS and NBC, respectively.

If the Big Ten indeed turned down such an offer, the concerns were likely distribution and visibility. Those same concerns would be in play if the Big Ten accepted the four additional Pac-12 schools.

Industry chatter has Oregon State and Washington State moving to the Mountain West if the Pac-12 collapses. At that point, the MWC would replace the Pac-12 as the largest FBS conference completely located in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones.

Adding to the intrigue, the Big Ten and Big 12 share the same media rights consultant, Endeavor, a global sports and entertainment company.

CBS Sports reported last month Endeavor was advising the Big 12 about whether it should add Pac-12 programs. Earlier this summer, CBS Sports reported the Big 12 was interested in the aforementioned "Four Corners" programs.

Since then, officials from Oregon and Washington have met with the Big Ten, according to multiple media reports. Earlier this month, Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said, for the first time publicly, he was interested in expanding to the Pac-12 footprint.

"Obviously going out west is where I would like to go -- entering that fourth time zone," he told The Athletic.

Whether the Big Ten expands again, the Big 12 is expected to remain interested in either two or four Pac-12 schools.

The potential for further realignment -- following the migration of USC and UCLAbia to the Big Ten -- has caused disruption in the industry.

Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff told CBS Sports in July: "Let's be very clear: No Pac-12 school is joining the Big 12."

Publicly, the remaining 10 Pac-12 schools have showed a united front. The league moved up negotiations for a new media rights deal in July. The difference is the Big Ten already has its new deal in place. Signed in August, the media rights agreement further solidified the Big Ten's top spot in earnings. Beginning in 2023, Big Ten schools are expected to earn an average of $75 million annually.

Meanwhile, the current Big 12 deal with FOX and ESPN doesn't expire until 2025; however, the Big 12 opened media rights discussions with its partners early and hopes to strike a deal earlier and richer than what the Pac-12 can acquire. The conference reported $46.2 million distributed to each of its schools in the last fiscal year. That includes Oklahoma and Texas, which are due to move to the SEC in 2025 at the latest.

Industry sources value a 10-team Pac-12 at $21 million to $30 million per school annually after the loss of USC and UCLAbia. The Pac-12's deal with FOX and ESPN expires in 2024.

The possibility of a merger between the Big 12 and Pac-12 was ruled out in July. Any combination of Big 12 and Pac-12 programs would not result in a significant revenue increase compared to those teams remaining with their conferences, multiple industry sources stated repeatedly over the last few months.

Big 12 sources pushed back at that assertion saying the league's next media rights contract -- including newcomers BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF -- will reflect an increase from the current deal.

It is believed the Big Ten's current rightsholders, FOX and ESPN, remain opposed to the conference expanding further. It is in the best interest for both networks for there to be a Pac-12, if for no other reason than cost certainty. After losing out on the new Big Ten deal, ESPN aims to acquire games that can be played in the "fourth window" -- after 10 p.m. FOX already has games in that window through its agreement with the Mountain West.

As the Big Ten's primary partner, FOX would likely consider four additional Pac-12 schools "dilutive" to the Big Ten product. Opponents of Big Ten expansion continue to scratch their heads wondering how Cal, Oregon, Stanford and Washington can bring enough value to the conference.

The answer? They don't. At least at first glance. However, Warren's play may be to get in on the ground floor with Amazon during a time in which when streaming is further catching up with linear cable. That hasn't happened yet despite Amazon's NFL ratings success with "Thursday Night Football."

Adding four more Pac-12 schools would result in expanded Big Ten content, giving the conference approximately 112 games annually. Amazon, or the newest media partner, would likely get the fifth, sixth or seventh pick of a Big Ten home game each week.

One industry observer compared the level of potentially available content equal to what is currently shown weekly on the Big Ten Network. Think about games like California vs. Buttgers, Northwestern vs. Stanford and Oregon vs. Indianus. (As CBS Sports reported last week, the newest media partner would not get any games involving Michigan, Ohio State or Penn State.)

A different industry critic stressed there is no strategic reason for the Big Ten to expand further. In fact, that person thought expansion might invite lawsuits from slighted programs and possible scrutiny from the federal government.

If the Big Ten and/or Big 12 make a move for Pac-12 programs, the potential collapse of the Pac-12 could come amid FBS commissioners expanding the College Football Playoff. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey is among those who have advocated for CFP expansion to make the sport more of a national game.

The Pac-12 has participated in the CFP only twice in eight years.



[/SPOILER}

I'd take three of those teams but fuck those Libs at Cal. Too much Political BS with them and with Stanford we'd already have the TV's in that market. Expand the TV market more. Would rather have ASU, Utah, Colorado or Arizona than Cal. Cal doesn't put much into their sports programs.

 

[Alum-Ni]

A Pac-12 centric article......expansion candidates for them should the league survive

Canzano: Handicapping Pac-12 expansion candidates

With help from the late Yogi Berra

www.johncanzano.com

Spoiler: Article

Handicapping Pac-12 expansion candidates
by John Canzano
The late, great Yogi Berra would have been great to have around the Pac-12 Conference offices. You know, Commissioner George Kliavkoff could have sent Berra out every time media members asked about expansion.

“The future,” Yogi once said, “ain’t what it used to be.”

Kliavkoff set a loose timeline for expansion discussions in our talk last week. He said the conference’s media rights negotiations need to get done first. Then, the conference presidents and chancellors would pivot toward the expansion discussion.

I think he’s being wise. I also think the Pac-12 wants to know what is going to happen with UCLAbia before it seriously considers adding new members. The Bruins are likely gone to the Big Ten, but the UC Regents need to weigh in formally first.

As Yogi Berra said once, “It ain’t over till it’s over.”

Will the UC system penalize UCLAbia and force the Bruins to subsidize Cal? Will that penalty be so stiff that UCLAbia might consider staying in the Pac-12? All good questions. I lean heavily toward the Bruins exiting as announced in 2024, but I don't blame the Pac-12 one bit for wanting resolution before it thinks seriously about expansion.

I'm wondering if the Pac-12 will just want to get back to a dozen members or expand to 14 or maybe even 16. I'm having a difficult time finding 16 members that add enough media rights value unless the Pac-12 is going to poach a Big 12 member or two.

In the meantime, I've updated the possible expansion candidates below. Like Yogi once famously said," When you come to a fork in the road, take it."

The candidates:

SAN DIEGO STATE
The public research university boasts an alumni base of 300,000 and just opened a new 35,000-seat football stadium on campus. The biggest selling point to the Pac-12, however, is simple old-fashioned geography.

SDSU is located in Southern California, amid 1.1 million television households. Given the defections of USC and UCLAbia to the Big Ten, adding SDSU feels like a no-brainer for the Pac-12. The conference needs a tentpole university in Southern California. If the Pac-12 is only going to add one or two members, SDSU makes the cut.

Odds: Even

Biggest Question: If UCLAbia somehow ends up staying in the Pac-12, is SDSU the only addition?

=============================

SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY
The big-dollar boosters at SMU are eager for the institution to get to a Power Five Conference. SMU is a research university. That will play well with the academics in the Pac-12. The Mustangs only have an undergraduate enrollment of around 7,000 and play football in Gerald Ford Stadium (capacity: 32,000).

Best of all, the campus sits on 234 acres that sit smack in the middle of a Nielsen TV market (Dallas) that has 2.7 million households. The geography doesn't work well, but the television market is difficult to ignore.

Odds: 5-to-1

Biggest Question: If it takes SMU, would the Pac-12 need to take another Texas-based university?

=============================

UNLV
The Pac-12 holds its basketball and football championship games in Las Vegas and conference commissioner George Kliavkoff is well connected on The Strip. There are ample sponsorship opportunities, it's located in the Pacific Time Zone and the conference would get a foothold in a rapidly growing sports city.

The TV market is just so-so (No. 40 nationally), but UNLV is a speculative play all the way. The football hasn't been great historically. But conference expansion isn't about on-field performance as much as it is about adding strategic partners and capturing television households.

The Big Ten didn't want Buttgers and Maryland because of on-field football performance, for example. It wanted the New York and Washington, D.C. television markets.

I'm placing Vegas in front of some others here because I think it -- and 757,000 TV households -- offers strong upside. The population in the area grew 8.7 percent from 2010 to 2020. Projections predict that Las Vegas and Southern Nevada could have 3.3 million residents by 2060.

Odds: 6-to-1

Biggest Question: Does the growth in Las Vegas continue at record rates in the next 20 years?

=============================

BOISE STATE
Boise State desperately wants to get to the Pac-12 or Big 12. It hired consultants to help with that cause, per multiple sources. The Broncos know this is a limited window and maybe their best shot of getting to the Power Five. They currently receive about $5.5 million in annual media rights revenue. Boise State feels like a partner that would be willing to come at a discount in the first few years.

$12 million in year one?

$15 million in year two?

$20 million in year three?

If the Pac-12 wants to boost the media rights payouts to Oregon, Washington and others, this isn't a bad way to get there. If the Pac-12 added a couple of reduced-distribution members, it might be able to close the financial gap with the Big Ten and SEC. I don't think the presidents and chancellors in the Pac-12 will love the academic fit, but this is a new world and Boise State has a strong relationship with ESPN. If the Pac-12 chooses to add only two members, I have a difficult time seeing Boise State as a pick. But if it adds four or six, this could work.

Odds: 8-to-1

Biggest Question: If you add multiple Mountain West Conference schools.........do you become the Mountain West?

=============================

RICE
If the Pac-12 is going to take SMU, I have to think it would also look hard at Rice University. The Owls are the fifth-smallest school competing in FBS football nationally, but the campus sits in a television market (Houston) that includes 2.5 million homes.

Since 1996, Rice has bounced from the Southwest Conference to the WAC to Conference USA and is now set to join the American Athletic Conference in 2023. But the move is viewed by industry insiders as temporary. Could the Pac-12 poach Rice to help justify the SMU addition? Are there other candidates in Texas and Louisiana that make more sense?

Odds: 9-to-1

Biggest Question: The Pac-12 criticized USC and UCLAbia for ignoring geography, is it committing the same sin here?

=============================

FRESNO STATE
I nearly placed the Bulldogs in front of Boise State on this list because I think Fresno State would be more motivated to take a substantial discount.

It wants to be included.

It always has.

The Central California Valley television market doesn't blow you away, but it's fertile recruiting territory. The proximity in California to Los Angeles and the Bay Area is a selling point. If you rope in the Sacramento DMA -- a reach, I know -- the television market starts to get interesting.

The biggest selling point is simply the Pacific Time Zone. If ESPN and others are interested in owning the majority of college football inventory in the time zone, Fresno State could be a wise addition. I don't think the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors will fall all over themselves to get the Bulldogs. But at the right price?

Odds: 10-to-1

Biggest Question: Would Fresno State be willing to come into the conference at a significantly reduced media rights payout?

=============================

SOUTHWEST POD
There are a number of interesting universities in Texas and Louisiana that might be attractive if the Pac-12 decides to venture outside the Pacific Time Zone. Would the conference want to grow to 16 teams? If the Pac-12 added SMU and Rice, could it find two other partners and create a four-team pod in the Texas and Louisiana region?

I keep thinking about a conversation I had recently with Mississippi State coach Mike Leach. I asked abut the biggest differences between the Pac-12 and SEC. Leach said it was defensive tackles. He pointed to the ample number of talented high school defensive linemen being recruited from Texas and Louisiana. I wonder if the Pac-12 would want to plant a flag in the region.

Odds: 15-to-1

Biggest Question: Does this dilute the Pac-12 to the point of no return?

 

[Irv]

Our friend on twitter says FSU, Miami, UVA, Va Tech to B1G and UNC, Duke, NC State, Clemson to SEC.

 

[BBTown Bomber]

Our friend on twitter says FSU, Miami, UVA, Va Tech to B1G and UNC, Duke, NC State, Clemson to SEC.

No thanks.......


.

 

[Jim14510]

UNC, Duke, NC State,

These 3 make more sense in the B1G.

 

[Jim14510]

I'm going to say UNC, NC St, Duke and Virgina end up in the B1G and the other 4 end up in the SEC.

 

[BorWhiskey]

 

[BorWhiskey]

Our friend on twitter says FSU, Miami, UVA, Va Tech to B1G and UNC, Duke, NC State, Clemson to SEC.

I don’t see how we add VT. No value. Not AAU, would be a bottom 4 school overall academically (we still holden’ down dead-ass last), and highly dilutive to the margins.

No

Fucking

Way

And you can quote me on that shit, genetics, since your sources are randos on the World Wide Web.

The other three make sense. Hell, Duke makes more sense than VT in a package deal with UNC. They are very well endowed.

For the record, FSU and Miami would both be upper half academically even with the inclusion of USC and UCLAbia.

 

[Baron Winnebago]

I don’t see how we add VT. No value. Not AAU, would be a bottom 4 school overall academically (we still holden’ down dead-ass last), and highly dilutive to the margins.

No

Fucking

Way

And you can quote me on that shit, genetics, since your sources are randos on the World Wide Web.

The other three make sense. Hell, Duke makes more sense than VT in a package deal with UNC. They are very well endowed.

For the record, FSU and Miami would both be upper half academically even with the inclusion of USC and UCLAbia.

BC would be better that Va Tech

 

[BorWhiskey]

BC would be better that Va Tech

I would like us to add BC and Pitt. Establish a strong northeast region. Would be fun seeing the former Big East teams playing each other.

Neither are AAU but both great academically.

 

[Irv]

The other three make sense. Hell, Duke makes more sense than VT in a package deal with UNC. They are very well endowed.